Timeline for How can I get a player to accept that they should stop trying to pull stunts without thinking them through first?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 2019 at 13:57 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | @hajef I understand your point and we are mostly in agreement. I think my core point backed up by experience is that some players don't "get it" until they lose a character or two doing really dumb stuff. Others don't even need to lose one. | |
| Jul 11, 2019 at 13:56 | comment | added | hajef | @KorvinStarmast I don't say that PC death is inherently bad or that it can not be a usefull tool or even fun, but most ppl. would want to avoid getting their PCs killed and most DM would try to at least give the PCs good chances of survival. That's why this question was asked: Answering recklessnes with immediate PC death is rarely fun or the best cause of action. I mostly play short adventures so there is not much time to get attached and plenty time to chreate a new character between campains but I still don't feal that any character is disposable. It would be a loss and a shame most cases. | |
| Jul 11, 2019 at 13:06 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | @Ben IMO and IME both; if character loss stresses someone out in an RPG, they need to take a step back and do a little introspective survey of why they got that attached to a PC. I've seen a bunch of unhealthy over attachment over the years ... I appreciate that the tolerance for PC death varies from table to table. | |
| Jul 11, 2019 at 13:03 | comment | added | Ben | There's nothing wrong with failure. I'm just coming from the approach that this is affecting gameplay, and is stressing people out. Character loss can be an additional stress on top of that, so from that point of view, the best way to handle it is to say "no" now, and then develop something specifically for it in the future | |
| Jul 11, 2019 at 12:58 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | @hajef In RPG's and particularly in D&D, PC actions have "in game world" consequences. Learning that "doing that badly thought out thing can get you killed" sometimes (depends on the person) needs to be experienced all the way through "in game." (And for some people, it is not necessary). I don't agree with your assumption, but we have probably lhad a variety of different table experiences over the years. The whole "are you sure" tool is a means to let the foolish PC die trying a foolish thing if they stubbornly persist. | |
| Jul 11, 2019 at 12:48 | comment | added | hajef | @KorvinStarmast A failed assasination attempt with no backup plans is sure to end in the assasin's death (and at least an intence hunt for their co-consipricors) and killing off a PC and likely the entire party is not what most players and DMs consider to be fun. | |
| Jul 9, 2019 at 20:37 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | While I don't disagree with a lot of your answer, what is the harm in the player trying and failing? Isn't there game play value in that also? | |
| Jul 9, 2019 at 0:12 | history | edited | Ben | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Jul 8, 2019 at 23:59 | history | answered | Ben | CC BY-SA 4.0 |